Jobs That AI Will Replace. Very Soon!

[The Atheist]

Now that the propellor-heads have got AI to the point where it "thinks" sufficiently like a human to be useful, it's going to have an impact on the workforce much greater than robotics.

The fun thing is, instead of forcing the layoff of millions of blue-collar workers, AI is going to take square aim at white-collar workers.

Two of the biggest white-collar sectors who should be studying for their barista qualifications right now are those at banks and insurance companies. Engineering, too, will be changed out of all recognition. Who needs 20 traffic engineers, when you have one computer doing the same job much fast and better than the team of professionals costing $200k each?

Given our slavish devotion to the Friedman Doctrine, companies will be falling over themselves to get rid of people and invest in machines.

Advertising agencies? Who needs 'em? A single AI computer will devise a campaign that works without human input. We know how easy it is to persuade people, thanks to my pal Robert Mercer and Cambridge Analytica.

The next ten years are going to see a complete change in employment dynamics, and white-collar workers are going to be a dying breed.

 

[Darat]

Lawyers
General Practitioners
Medical Consultants

 

[welshdean]

Lawyers
General Practitioners Medical Consultants

Surely these are safer than the 'alternatives'?

 

[welshdean]

Lawyers
General Practitioners Medical Consultants

Surely these are safer than the 'alternatives'?


ETA: Alt med, just to remove any ambiguity.

 

[Trebuchet]

Not impacted: CEO's. CFO's. And any other senior mis-managers.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Now that the propellor-heads have got AI to the point where it "thinks" sufficiently like a human to be useful, it's going to have an impact on the workforce much greater than robotics.

The fun thing is, instead of forcing the layoff of millions of blue-collar workers, AI is going to take square aim at white-collar workers.

Two of the biggest white-collar sectors who should be studying for their barista qualifications right now are those at banks and insurance companies. Engineering, too, will be changed out of all recognition. Who needs 20 traffic engineers, when you have one computer doing the same job much fast and better than the team of professionals costing $200k each?

Given our slavish devotion to the Friedman Doctrine, companies will be falling over themselves to get rid of people and invest in machines.

Advertising agencies? Who needs 'em? A single AI computer will devise a campaign that works without human input. We know how easy it is to persuade people, thanks to my pal Robert Mercer and Cambridge Analytica.

The next ten years are going to see a complete change in employment dynamics, and white-collar workers are going to be a dying breed.

They said that about machines, computers, robots ...

Sure, things have changed, but not in the way predicted. What has happened is that we get more production (AND, more disastrous crashes ).

 

[Darat]

Surely these are safer than the 'alternatives'?

In the UK the GPs have a wide but not very deep education (not that it isn't hard) they could almost be replaced with a rule based checklist as it is.

Medical consultants, already AI systems have been proved to be at least as good as trained, experienced consultants at detecting disease from the likes of CT scans, MRIs and so on.

 

[Olmstead]

Translation. In fact, I'm getting sick of playing a machine's proofreader, so I'm ready for the end times.

 

[novaphile]

Actual 'job' that AIs will replace:

1. Posting inane, stupidly wrong stuff on the internet.

 

[bruto]

I wonder if there is going to be a significant difference between expert systems and AI with relation to medicine. Current AI examples seem to be feeding on the bulk of available information, and coming up with convincing output based on that. But in the world of the internet, a large part of the information is junk.

A medical expert system is focused on some specific thing, which seems like a good idea. I heard about a recent study in which an AI expert is assigned to sort through the enormous bulk of possible effects of various possible medicines for specific ailments, and save the doctor the job of trying them out, of knowing them all, etc. It apparently succeeded in suggesting relatively unusual treatments for difficult patients, that worked. That sounds like a pretty good idea.

And it does seem as if AI experts are better at detecting diseases and sorting complicated data.

But is there some way a more generally educated AI can distinguish between good and bad ideas, other than being told? Maybe there is, but I have a feeling there will always be a need for some real people to check results.

 

[Trebuchet]

Actual 'job' that AIs will replace:

1. Posting inane, stupidly wrong stuff on the internet.

I disagree. They will be more accurate than a significant majority of humans.

 

[Robin]

In the UK the GPs have a wide but not very deep education (not that it isn't hard) they could almost be replaced with a rule based checklist as it is.

Medical consultants, already AI systems have been proved to be at least as good as trained, experienced consultants at detecting disease from the likes of CT scans, MRIs and so on.

"Do no harm"
"What's harm?"

 

[Robin]

Not impacted: CEO's. CFO's. And any other senior mis-managers.

Although those are the jobs AI is most capable of replacing.

 

[BrettM]

I wish somebody would replace the ruling party in my country with AI. The AI would doe a much better job, and at lower cost. It doesn't even have to be particularly intelligent AI to be effective. A first-generation "dumb" AI will be more than adequate.

 

[Trebuchet]

Although those are the jobs AI is most capable of replacing.

Absolutely! But they are in a position to prevent it.

 

[The Atheist]

Lawyers
General Practitioners
Medical Consultants

I agree entirely. GP seems to be the almost-perfect case of something a machine will do better than a human.

I doubt it'll be popular, however.

They said that about machines, computers, robots ...

Sure, things have changed, but not in the way predicted. What has happened is that we get more production (AND, more disastrous crashes ).

Except that's exactly what did happen. Take a look at a production plant now vs 1970 - the number of people is vastly lower, and production vastly higher, because machines work faster.

I don't know who it was, but some bloke once calculated that 50% of the entire workforce would need to be employed as telephone operators to cope with today's call volume if we still used 1950s technology for connecting calls.

How many telephone operators exist in 2023?

 

[MRC_Hans]

I agree entirely. GP seems to be the almost-perfect case of something a machine will do better than a human.

I doubt it'll be popular, however.



Except that's exactly what did happen. Take a look at a production plant now vs 1970 - the number of people is vastly lower, and production vastly higher, because machines work faster.

I don't know who it was, but some bloke once calculated that 50% of the entire workforce would need to be employed as telephone operators to cope with today's call volume if we still used 1950s technology for connecting calls.

How many telephone operators exist in 2023?

That is the point: Production went up. To be sure, some jobs went away. The phone operators are now online salespeople, or such. Employment rates are roughly the same

Hans

 

[SteveAitch]

I agree entirely. GP seems to be the almost-perfect case of something a machine will do better than a human.

I doubt it'll be popular, however.

As my local GP does minor surgery (removing skin-tags and so on), innoculations, takes blood for blood-tests, does (necessary) hands-on examinations, I don't see GPs being replaced in the near future.

 

[novaphile]

As my local GP does minor surgery (removing skin-tags and so on), innoculations, takes blood for blood-tests, does (necessary) hands-on examinations, I don't see GPs being replaced in the near future.

Indeed, it would take longer to equip a robot for each patient than it would take a GP to perform the examination. (And you'd have to know in advance what examinations are being done). Unless you're imagining an AI running some sort of Swiss Army device that somehow loads, uses, sterilises (or discards) every necessary instrument.

Some parts, sure. For example I have my own blood-pressure machine, info from that could be fed into an AI. But far simpler for a machine like that to just report results to the existing medical software that the Doctors use (this is already happening).

 

[MRC_Hans]

As my local GP does minor surgery (removing skin-tags and so on), innoculations, takes blood for blood-tests, does (necessary) hands-on examinations, I don't see GPs being replaced in the near future.

Plus, half the time, GPs are simply talking to people. Meeting a human is important for most patients. However, an AI system could chew over symptoms and test results and spot cases of diseases that the ordinary seldom meets and thus may not think of.

Hans